X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ?

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Gregmang)

Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:11:08 GMT

like a VR6 ?

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (daveny5)

Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:43:14 GMT

Dual overhead cams!" />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Jim Roseberry)

Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:41:31 GMT

...... 4 days ....... > 320 views ....... no response ......... Hope I'm wong but I can only assume that the answer is probably no ........... if so ...... thats *VERY* disappointing

Hi Timboe,

Looking at past experience...
I wouldn't expect a major change to the audio engine in a point release.
That would be a major (welcome) update... " />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (pwal)

Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:15:36 GMT

laxative++ lol

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (hueseph)

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:42:47 GMT

Must be installed as administrator. Don't forget.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (DonaldDuck)

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:37:03 GMT

hueseph

X1c Expanded is rock solid on this machine.

I'm actually trying the update to X1c from b tonight on my laptop. Since getting it to work on my main tracking computer was an epic failure, I thought i'd give it a spin on my laptop first. Let's hope it goes well. If not, System Restore shall save the day.. err or night.

PS. Nice feet? lol " />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (hueseph)

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:21:02 GMT

X1c Expanded is rock solid on this machine.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (DonaldDuck)

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:41:37 GMT

Bristol_Jonesey

I'm not sure what possessed the powers that be to beat a new path through DAW wilderness when the old path worked amazingly well.

I know what it was.

it was the result of User Requests.

A couple of years ago all registered users were asked what the new version should focus on.

the overwhelming responses was a total revamp of the GUI and less focus on new shiny plugins.

Oh, I do believe I remember such an event. I asked for greater Midi features.

I don't recall many wanting a complete redo of pretty much everything like changing keyboard shortcuts that had been in Sonar since I stated using it... Surely they could have made a different GUI without totally destroying everything they had developed over the past 4 or 5 versions. That would my point... Using X1 was like using totally new software, and I've been a Sonar user since version 4.

Further, anyone who knows the basics of computer programming knows you can moreless use the same coding but make it look completely different. For example, I can make the "paste" function an Apple Graphic in the top left or a Banana Graphic in the bottom right of the screen. It looks different, but it would function the same.

On my system, X1 is far less stable than 8.5.3, and I know I'm not the only one. Surely, Cakewalk (Roland) made major changes under the hood, not just in the GUI. That is the annoying part for me. Don't totally change everything we hold dear while making less stable. Some of us make money from our DAW. We don't have time for silly games just trying to get the bloated software to work. It frankly needs a good laxative." />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Muzock)

Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:56:22 GMT

A little bit more for the staff view please and at least to put back what we had before...if it is posible.
TY

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (trimph1)

Sat, 04 Feb 2012 07:55:49 GMT

arringtonproducions

Hey here is a suggestion: How about a full PDF real set of instructions!!!!!!!!!!!! This is the first time I have had to go to the book store and buy a manual for all the nuts and bolts of a fresh bought product.

There is one....

http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/kb/reader.aspx/2007013228

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (disrezolution)

Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:14:42 GMT

Hey here is a suggestion: How about a full PDF real set of instructions!!!!!!!!!!!! This is the first time I have had to go to the book store and buy a manual for all the nuts and bolts of a fresh bought product.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Bristol_Jonesey)

Sat, 04 Feb 2012 04:01:21 GMT

I'm not sure what possessed the powers that be to beat a new path through DAW wilderness when the old path worked amazingly well.

I know what it was.

it was the result of User Requests.

A couple of years ago all registered users were asked what the new version should focus on.

the overwhelming responses was a total revamp of the GUI and less focus on new shiny plugins.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (DonaldDuck)

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:26:26 GMT

timboe

Hi all !

Thanks for the supporting comments.

Whilst I genuinely do welcome and value the $10 Expaned offer and the impending X1D update ...... to me, if the " foundation / engine " isnt continually improving the rest is quite secondary. All the features in the world are of little use or value if engine stability is not " rock solid ".

FWIW .... I run a 12 core Intel i7 4.2gig DAW with 12 gig ram ..... fully optimized for audio .... with and RME FireFace UC at 88.2 / 24 Bit / 96 Samples [ 3.97 ms real-world latency ] ........the system is rock solid .... and as I use large numbers of Multi-output VST and efx all live inpt monitored, most of my projects run on a CPU load of ~%50 <-> %70.

I push my DAW and Sonar very hard ..... probably much harder than the majority of users around here.

In my DAW, the same projects loaded in X1C are nowhere near as stable / smooth / glitch free as 8.5.3.

Anyway ..... the above is just a long way of explaining why for me any global audio engine improvments in X1D will be much anticipated and very much welcomed [ if there are any ].

All the best to all.

Ben

Same here! I still use 8.5.3 because it simply works. I'm not sure what possessed the powers that be to beat a new path through DAW wilderness when the old path worked amazingly well." />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (elijahlucian)

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 11:12:07 GMT

CakeAlexS

elijahlucian wrote:

my point was: why spend money when you shouldn't have to? if i just lie over and go buy something else instead of holding a company liable for their product, they will never make their products better.
its capitalism.

Yeah that really worked with the bankers didn't it?
Oh - did you forget? - you pressed the I Agree button when you installed the software.
Just like all good schemes - there's always a way out of the Capitalist fantasty that's never a reality.
Oh well better luck next time....

On a serious note you cannot expect all code to work 100% of the time on different systems the way you want it. And legally you cannott expect it either. Dream on and get back to reality :)

BTW some military applications are written in JAVA for instance, if some missile accidently bombs the wrong country just because there was a bug in the JAVA programming language Sun Microsystems are not liable because the attacker pressed the I agree button.

Also note you don't own the software, you merely have a license to use it.

it comes down to me being a paying customer and customer service. any businessman worth his pennies knows this. If a company doesn't give you what you need, then you find a new one. I have made an investment in cakewalk by purchasing their software. they know that i will buy upgrades, plugins etc, IF they keep me satisfied as a customer. If they do not, then I find a company that will serve me better.

sure I pressed the I agree button, but it comes down to me buying updates, plugins and telling people what a good company they are. Or losing that client. dollars.

CAPITALISM.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (pwal)

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:28:28 GMT

steely dan++ lol, or any modern pop tune ;-)

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Bristol_Jonesey)

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:45:56 GMT

Maybe a John Cage composition?

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (daryl1968)

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:34:29 GMT

is he doing the new Steely Dan album? You'd need half of those tracks just for micing the snare

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Bristol_Jonesey)

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:12:01 GMT

Perhaps he's recording a full sized concert orchestra, all close mic'ed?

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (FastBikerBoy)

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 04:56:30 GMT

Curiosity has got the better of me, and I've plenty of time today

timboe

FWIW - in the last year or so for reasons I dont really understand - I have been getting and doing a lot of Euro / Trance Dance. Huge numbers of VSTi's all multi-outputed lots of convo reverbs etc..... I can assure, at 48 samples, you can get to very high cpu useage very quickly ... anyway, I digress - maybe the folowing is easier to try:-

Try this test:-

=> Set your Buffer Latency to 48 or 64 Samples [ 128 is OK but it will take a lot more tracks as per below ]

Left mine on my normal settings. Experience has taught me that settings tuned to a system is a very important part of what Sonar can and can't do

=> open a clean / new / empty project
=> insert x 1 mono audio track
=> MUTE it and enable REC and Input Monitoring
=> slide the Vol / Vel all to zero
=> insert 5 different Sonitus Plugs - Rev / Mod / Delay / Mutli Comp / EQ
=> load a preset for each Sonitus plug and enable each of them
=> copy / clone that one Track 10 / 20 / 50 / 100 etc.... times until your Windows Task Manager is sitting around %50 <-> %60

Done all of that. Can't say I'll ever see myself needing 150 audio tracks all with input monitoring but whatever takes your fancy. " />

=> insert one more audio track with some audio on it - say a 4 bar drum loop - anything will do - and set it to loop
=> hit play in the looped section so that Playback does not stop / audio engine does not dis-engage
=> whislt the project is playing back, insert one instance of Rapture - does everything remain playing back without artifact or any sort of audible glitch ?

Slight pause as I predicted

=> whislt the project is playing back, open any Rapture sound - does everything remain playing back without artifact or any sort of audible glitch ?

Yes, CPU at 75% no glitch or pause

=> whislt the project is playing back, replace the Rapture instance with one Dimension Pro instance - does everything remain playing back without artifact or any sort of audible glitch ?

Slight pause as experienced when inserting rapture

=> whislt the project is playing back, open any Dim Pro sound bank - does everything remain playing back without artifact or any sort of audible glitch ?

Yes, no pause or glitch

=> whislt the project is playing back, SAVE the project - does everything remain playing back without artifact or any sort of audible glitch ?

Some slight glitches on opening the save as dialogue and while the save takes place.

Again ...... for me, with my DAW, the above cannot be done with X1C Expanded.

Again, I'd check your system over..........

Agsin ...... purely of audio engine comparison, the exact same above at 48 Samples @ 88.2k / 24 Bit is perfect / glitch free in S1V2 - there is absolutly no change to audio playback and stabilty - it is utterly invisible and transparent.

Is working at 48 Samples really necessary especially if it stops you working? Drop it back a little.

Out of curiosity why do you need 150 plus tracks all with 5 effects on and input monitoring, got a very large live room? " />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Splat)

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:16:17 GMT

elijahlucian wrote:

my point was: why spend money when you shouldn't have to? if i just lie over and go buy something else instead of holding a company liable for their product, they will never make their products better.
its capitalism.

Yeah that really worked with the bankers didn't it?
Oh - did you forget? - you pressed the I Agree button when you installed the software.
Just like all good schemes - there's always a way out of the Capitalist fantasty that's never a reality.
Oh well better luck next time....

On a serious note you cannot expect all code to work 100% of the time on different systems the way you want it. And legally you cannott expect it either. Dream on and get back to reality :)

BTW some military applications are written in JAVA for instance, if some missile accidently bombs the wrong country just because there was a bug in the JAVA programming language Sun Microsystems are not liable because the attacker pressed the I agree button.

Also note you don't own the software, you merely have a license to use it.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (pwal)

Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:41:47 GMT

i don't think they've "made the audio engine worse" but they've definitely added a load of extra overhead with new gui... and yes, after 20+ years i think it's time to rewrite some code...

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (JClosed)

Tue, 31 Jan 2012 03:08:11 GMT

Hmmm.. Well I think I said it before, but I think a lot of people just underestimate the challenge a total sound-engine redesign will be. The sound-engine is interwoven with about every aspect of X1, so a redesign of the sound-engine would probably also mean a re-design of the parts interacting with the user interface (otherwise it is like fitting a square block in a round hole). Taking this in consideration it would mean an almost completely re-write of Sonar itself. Yes newcomers can have a gapeless engine, but they started from scratch while Sonar has to be re-designed. So - I would not count on a fast re-write of the Sonar core engine. Just a few toughts...

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (FastBikerBoy)

Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:57:42 GMT

it ran all day long at 32 samples doing whatever you threw at it [ back in the days of 8.5.3 ]

Now I'm confused. Are you saying they've made the audio engine worse in X1? I though it was 'untouched'? " />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (FastBikerBoy)

Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:53:22 GMT

I'm going to decline the second test for the following reasons.

1. I can't run at anything less than 64 samples.

2. I'm a mere amateur so I use the software in a way that works for me, what you are trying to get me to do I do in a completely different way. I use a mixer and monitor direct from the hardware with external gear in a way that works rather than try to use it in a way that doesn't. If it didn't work how I wanted it to I'd buy some software that did.

3. Even if I did perform the test, I already know there is going to be a pause but that's a long way from what I thought the problem you were having which was

Despite the sheer grunt of my DAW, even a simple " replace a Raprure synth patch with a Dim Pro synth patch " either crashes Sonar or just results in no sound for that track ..... seriously, on my DAW, its terrible / utterly unuseable.

4. This subject has been done to death and I'm not disagreeing I'd like to see improvements too, it's just not that important to me personally.

Hope they get it sorted for you and I think I'll stay at the level I'm at making a bit of money with a few paying clients rather than trying to make a living from it, live gets far too complicated apparently.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (musicroom)

Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:21:33 GMT

daryl1968

you're probably right musicroom - you're George Martin comment is absolutely correct. Necessity is the mother of invention - have you read "Here There and Everywhere" by Geoff Emerick?

I just looked it up Daryl - looks like a great read. I'll put that one on my Amazon wish list.

Thanks

I think we all see where the OP is going with this, and don't blame him. It's just not that important to me. I record seamlessly at 64 samples and feel grateful for the privilege to do so with practically no realistic boundaries. It seems a little spoiled to me to be impatient about this. For I know the audio engine in Sonar will always be on the improvement to-do list at Cake. Where they have it now is more than fine for me. But for the OP, I hope he gets what he wants. Just not sure it is a need at this point.

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (Scott Lee)

Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:08:39 GMT

" />

Huge thumbs up for this thread. My biggest gripe is with Sonars audio Engine. Id like to get my groove back with sonar again and would fully support a redo of the audio engine for both accuracy and a gapless experience.

Best,

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (timboe)

Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:42:19 GMT

backwoods

Monitoring at 48 samples: that's your problem right there, that and Euro Dance " />

" />..... now that made me laugh big time !!!!!!!!

Bill ..... I guess we'll just have to respectfully agree to disagree.

You see operating at 48 samples with large loads as extreme / unnecessary / asking for trouble.

I see it as " close-to-hardware " as I can run.

48 Samples is not bleeding edge or extreme - RME / Echo Audio / Lynx all have rock solid stable drivers that run at 32 samples for their PCI cards - I'm only running at 48 samples now  because I moved to a more portable RME FFUC [ USB ] which doesnt have a 32 sample buffer setting due to current windows architecture limitations - I *was* using an EchoAudio Layla 3G at 32 samples and again, like my RME it was essentially, uncrashable - it ran all day long at 32 samples doing whatever you threw at it [ back in the days of 8.5.3 ]

As an aside, your  MOTU wont do it is because their drivers are simply not what they used to be.

And to a larg'ish extent, I do agree with you about your " needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few " argument.

But .... again ..... you seem to be missing my point.

I am just trying to highlight that Sonar's Audio Engine is falling behind and I gave 2 [ albeit very full-on ] examples .... again Bill, doesnt it seem odd / concerning to you that S1V2 can effortlessly do what I am " exampling " [ woohooo a new word ]   yet X1c Expanded cant ..... to my way of thinking, simple   "stress-testing" like this is almost certainly indicative of other deeper problems

I'm not bagging CW - not at all - as I said before ...... I just want the Sonar engine to get better [ much better ] and my concern is that it simply is not a " Tier One " priority for CW ...... why it is not a priority just baffles me ....... and its even more baffling when new competitors [ as I have mentioned ] seem to be much further down this road than a 15 - 20 year old DAW veteran.

All the best Bill.

Tim

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (John T)

Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:31:39 GMT

...

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (billruys)

Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:15:33 GMT

daryl1968

bill - John was responding to another post by elijahlucian

That's what I get for reading in flat-viewing mode, I guess. I don't like the tree structure on the CW forums, but reading flat leads to these problems. " />

Re:X1D Question ....... any specific improvements to the Audio Engine ? (daryl1968)

Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:10:51 GMT

bill - John was responding to another post by elijahlucian